What the Climate Establishment Missed About the Gates Memo

"When Bill Gates published his latest essay on climate change, the response was immediate. Many critics accused him of defeatism or saw the memo as another example of billionaires bending a knee to the climate denialism of President Donald Trump. (Trump himself was a fan.) Others told him to stop opining about climate change. "Respectfully, Bill Gates Should Shut Up," read a headline by the online magazine Slate."

"In his memo, the billionaire who once urged the world to "innovate our way out of a climate disaster" now seemed to be lowering the bar—arguing that global warming, while devastating, "will not lead to humanity's demise," and that the world's climate-change strategy should focus on human welfare over temperature or emissions goals. That message struck a nerve in a movement that has fought for decades against the oil and gas industry's multimillion-dollar campaign to fund climate denial and delay."

"Gates would be wrong on that front; for some small island states, which face the imminent threat of being submerged by rising seas, climate change is humanity's demise. But by dismissing his argument, many critics ended up downplaying a different kind of truth: Making emissions reductions the core climate strategy is not serving many of the people most affected by climate change."

A prominent wealthy technologist argued that global warming, while devastating, will not lead to humanity's demise and urged climate strategy to prioritize human welfare over strict temperature or emissions targets. Critics responded strongly, accusing him of defeatism and aligning with climate denial, and some demanded he stop commenting. The critique highlighted that focusing primarily on emissions reductions can fail to serve many people most affected by climate change, particularly in poor countries. Small island states face imminent submersion, demonstrating that emissions reductions remain existential for some. Leaders from the global South have long advocated prioritizing human welfare within climate commitments.

Read at The Atlantic